To be shocked the librarian was so poorly read?

[bendmeoverbackwards]

In the library recently reserving some books for dd. Librarian had not heard of A Handmaid’s Tale and did not know that As you Like It was written by Shakespeare.

These are not exactly obscure books!

AIBU?

Shakespeare IS 'the line'

What does that even mean?
That everyone has to know every play written by Shakespeare?
Or that everyone should have heard of him?
Or that everyone should name at least one play?

Yes, some posters have made judgemental comments against people they consider ignorant, but they have been in a distinct minority. Allegations of snobbery and pearl-clutching, on the other hand, have been made against a sweep of posters on here without reason.

I haven't done an exhaustive analysis of the thread, but I suspect you're biased in your perspective.

@mermaidsariel news flash for you, till assistants don't usually stock the shelves so my point is still valid

Yes there’s been no snobbery on a thread that contains a postings such as one that outright says that anyone who doesn’t know who wrote a certain play is basically unemployable...

None at all.

Allegations of snobbery and pearl-clutching, on the other hand, have been made against a sweep of posters on here without reason.
Without reason?
How would you describe the claims from people that someone not knowing a particular author means they have inadequate knowledge to do their job, regardless of the other knowledgethe person has?
How do you explain the fact that people challenging the "surely everyone knows" attitude is met with claims of people hating knowledge, viewing reading as poncey, anti-intellectualism?
How would you explain the fact that several posters think others knowing different texts and topics to them is apparently "depressing"?

I do think it is highly snobby for someone to decide that their chosen texts and authors are somehow the essential benchmark of appropriate knowledge. I think it’s especially snobby for someone to find someone doesn't know a text and then go for a good old circle jerk of "oh yes, how awful, people should absolutely know all this stuff... look at everyone else being so anti-intellectual".

I love reading. I love learning about things.
I happen to have a strong dislike for people belittling and mocking others for not knowing things. In my experience the people who do that are never quite as smart as they think they are.

I also particularly liked the post which expressed disdain for the new fangled librarians who graduated with degrees who came out of new universities back in the 80s and 90s (like myself).
It was the death knell for the profession and make the start of the decline in Standards apparently

• from the new universities

MaMelon
There's been some brilliant posts like that on this thread.

I enjoyed the ones where knowledge or lack of knowledge about particular authors or texts dictates whether someone has enough knowledge to do their job.
There's so many experts on other people's jobs on here.

Yep, it’s been a most enlightening - and thoroughly entertaining - thread

I don't do sneering or snobbery and I firmly believe everybody should read whatever they want to read free of condescension from anybody else.

However I will try to answer the question posed by CaptainOatFlosser as best I can.

Margaret Atwood is an important novelist because of the themes she tackles and people in the literary world deem her significant enough to make her the (equal) most short-listed person for the Booker Prize, widely regarded as the world's pre-eminent literary award. She is one of only 5 people to have won it twice. She has won other awards too numerous to mention.

Unlike some Booker Prize winners, her books also often top the best-sellers charts, so she has popular appeal too. Genre-wise she has written poetry, children's books, non-fiction and even graphic novels, so if there is a 'line', no matter how squiggly, Atwood is surely on the side of being a recognisable name.

Personally I would expect anyone working in a book environment, whether a paid library assistant or an unpaid volunteer who has chosen to work in a library, to be aware of her. I wouldn't be shocked into pearl-clutching about it, but I would be mildly surprised.

@JustLyra

Yes there’s been no snobbery on a thread that contains a postings such as one that outright says that anyone who doesn’t know who wrote a certain play is basically unemployable...

None at all.

That was a particular highlight of the thread. Must tell my boss that. And clearly I shouldn't do the professional exams I am currently studying for as I lack intelligence as I've not heard of some Shakespeare play...

One could write a similar argument for JK Rowling, Dan Brown, Christopher Marlowe, Blackman...
I think the problem here is literature is subjective and you're trying to make it objective. You obviously think Atwood is important. I think she's written a few interesting books. I honestly couldn't argue that the Penelopeid is any better than the writer of The Silence of the Girls or Handmaid's is any better than Noughts and Crosses.
Incidentally I can't remember the writer of The Silence of the Girls, does that mean I am not worthy of my job, or does it simply mean the themes and story arc are more memorable than the name.

To be mildly surprised is one thing - but many of the opinions expressed on here about that particular library assistant go way beyond mild surprise and enter quite unpleasant territory.

I’m not sure a similar conversation at an issue desk would have caused me to be so surprised that I would have even been thinking about an hour later - I certainly wouldn’t have started a thread on MN about it. There’s something quite distasteful about pointing at someone for not knowing something you know.

The correct response when you find someone hasn't read a book you like is to describe what you enjoyed without giving spoilers, in the hope someone finds something that they enjoy.

thing47
Great post.

I'd have other authors that I would describe in a similar way. They're well known by many, especially those who read a lot, probably familiar to lots, but I wouldn't necessarily expect someond to know one author from the canon over others. If someone didn't know them / the book then it wouldn't register beyond "oh right, I'm sure it's not their cup of tea".

Some of the apparent disbelief that someone might not know particular authors or texts is comical.

They're well known by lots, especially those who read a lot, probably familiar to many, but I wouldn't necessarily expect someond to know one author from the canon over others. If someone didn't know them / the book then it wouldn't register beyond "oh right, I'm sure it's not their cup of tea".

I think fully trained librarians are few and far between in libraries these days. However, I would have thought that when library assistants are sought some effort should be made to see if they know anything at all about books. Good bookshops employees are generally reasonably knowledgeable so it shouldn't be that difficult.

What sort of books @ellyeth? Out of the millions of titles out there, which ones should the library assistant be grilled on in their 30-45 min interview? Bearing in mind that Atwood and Shakespeare aren’t necessarily the most requested authors at public library issue desks...

@Lweji - of course I’m biased, but I maintain many of the comments on here about snobbery are unjustified!

@JustLyra - if you’re responding to my post, I said very clearly that there were exceptions. No point arguing against something that was never said. FWIW I think the unemployability comments are ridiculous too.

@LolaSmiles - again, completely agree that those comments were unpleasant. But your responses on here suggest that everyone who has posted on here to agree there is some nugget of general knowledge that you might reasonably expect someone to know in a given context (not talking about this library worker or these bloody texts, but just something) is a sneering pseud. And actually, I do think that’s a problem - if suggesting that having a decent general knowledge and education gets you shot down in this way, then of course nobody wants to do it. We accept that ignorance is ok. I do not accept that thinking we have a problem with devaluing knowledge in this country is necessarily coupled with being a sneering snob.

This thread has just turned into posters slapping each other on the back for not being snobs and coming up with new ways to marvel at how anyone (note the ‘anyone’!) who disagrees is the type of person who goes around belittling others.

Yes, I do think it’s a poor reflection on something or other if someone manages to get through life without knowing the capital of France, one of the examples I gave above. If you think this makes me a terrible snob, then I accept we’ll have to agree to disagree.

I’m sure Margaret Atwood was much more requested after THMT was on the telly. Perhaps rather less now. That’s why she’s well known- not because she won the Booker prize 30 odd years ago. If people don’t watch terrestrial TV they are much less likely to have heard of her. Just as those of us who don’t have Sky or Netflix wouldn’t know of something televised there.

This thread has just turned into posters slapping each other on the back for not being snobs and coming up with new ways to marvel at how anyone (note the ‘anyone’!) who disagrees is the type of person who goes around belittling others

Interesting. Can you point to actual examples where people are slapping each other on the back? Although not being a snob is something to be proud of, surely.

I also particularly liked the post which expressed disdain for the new fangled librarians who graduated with degrees who came out of new universities back in the 80s and 90s (like myself).

And of course it is nonsense as all librarianship courses started in the polytechnics which eventually became the new universities. Of course some librarians would have done other degrees at older universities before doing a post grad course - at a polytechnic!

@YouShouldSeeMyNewHouse actually I have found a majority of this thread to be people finding different ways to look down on others for not meeting their standards.

I refer again to ‘thick as shite’.

MaMelon
I'm going to guess it means that some of us have agreed that looking down on people for not knowing a book/author is unpleasant and that there's something quite snobby about deciding people aren't fit for their job if they don't know books and authors that some folk think is essential.

@thing47 thank you for answering my question! I don’t agree with what you’re saying but I understand your points.